I'm clad in youthful green, I other colours scorn;
My silken baldric bears my bugle or my horn,
Which setting to my lips, I wind so loud and shrill,
As makes the echoes shout from every neighbouring hill.
My dog-hook at my belt, to which my Iyman's tied;
My sheaf of arrows bright, my wood-knife at my side;
My crossbow in my hand, my gaffle[1] on the rack
To bend it when I please; or if I list, to slack.
My hound then in my lyam, I by the woodman's art,
Forecast where I may lodge the goodly hie palmed hart.

* * * * *

The sylvans are my true subjects--I their king!

THE longbow was the national weapon of England; the arbalist, or crossbow, of the French,
Flemings, Germans, Italians, and Spaniards. In describing the latter, therefore, I shall chiefly confine
myself to its practice among those nations.

This instrument, anciently used both in war and the chase, is but a modification of the longbow, the
latter being a simple, the former a very complicated weapon. The crossbow, properly so called, was
unknown to the ancients, though they had something like it in the Balista.

In the brief description of Père Daniel, it is treated merely as a weapon of war, so Alonzo Martinez
de Espinar, the author of a delightful Spanish work on field sports, must be considered the only real
historian of this arm comparatively so little known in modern times.[2]

The oldest specimens now in use, are those of the Chevaliers Tireurs d'Anneci, in Savoy. This society,
formerly called the Jolly Companions, is so ancient that the period of its institution is entirely lost.
Their exercises were sanctioned by a patent from Prince Philip of Savoy, dated the 15th of May,
1519; and cotemporary with them there existed at Chamberry a fraternity which obtained a similar
charter from Duke Manuel Philiberg, about fifty years afterwards.

There were formerly as many companies of crossbowmen in the principal cities of France, as there
are of riflemen at the present day; and in some of its northern towns, and in Brabant, these two arms
are still practiced alternately. According to archives preserved in the Town Hall at Lisle, a fraternity
of crossbowmen flourished there as far back as 1379, and was suppressed by an ordinance of Council,
about half a century subsequently, during the reign of Francis I., its property and possessions being
given to the chief hospital of that town.

Similar societies still exist at Lennoy, Le Quesnoy, Comines, and at Roulaix, a little town one league
from Lisle, instituted by Pierre de Roulaix, lord of that place, in 1491. Those of Valenciennes and
Douay are only very recently abolished, companies of cannoniers, archers, and riflemen, commonly
called jouers des armes, having arisen in their stead.

There are exercises with the great and with the little crossbow; the first being weapons of a very large
size, which contest the prizes at much longer distances than the second. At La Basée, and
Hautbourdin, near Lisle, the arbalisters have adopted the smaller kind, in imitation of several societies
at Antwerp, Gand, Bruges, Louvain, Malines, Alost, &c.

Besides the hand crossbow, there were anciently others, of monstrous proportions, called arbalêtes
de passe, or ribeaudequins. This appellation, according to Fauchet[3], belonged to an enormous engine,
the lathe[4] of which measured twelve or fifteen feet. It was fixed upon a stock of proportionate length,
and at least a foot in diameter, containing a groove sufficient to receive an arrow, or rather javelin,
of two fathoms, winged with thin leaves of horn, or some kind of light wood.

These huge contrivances were permanently fixed on the walls of towns, castles, forts, &c. To bend
them, a windlass, managed by one, two, three, or even four men, according to their magnitude, was
necessary. Their arrows flew with prodigious violence, frequently traversing the bodies of several
successive men.

Many modern crossbows are constructed with a stock, similar in shape and dimensions to that of the
common fowling piece. Our ancestors generally preferred them straight, and much longer; and in
taking aim, rested the stock upon the shoulder, while its extreme end -projected behind[5]; a method
retained by most of the before-mentioned Continental societies. A few, however, not only substitute
the gun-stock for the ancient tiller, but have made many alterations in other parts of this weapon.
Thus, at Valenciennes, instead of the old-fashioned nut for receiving the string turning on a pivot
when the trigger was pulled, they have a notch in the stock itself, and the cord is confined there by
a flat piece of steel, opening and shutting like a valve. To free the string and discharge the arrow, it
is only necessary to touch a trigger which communicates with a spring within the body of the stock.

Having given this brief description of the French crossbow, ancient and modern, I will next remark
upon the arrows discharged from it. Of these there are several kinds, differing greatly from each
other, in length, thickness, manner of feathering, and shape of their heads. Some were winged with
horn, some with leather. Others, again, had merely three triangular projections, of the same wood of
which the arrow was made. The heads of many were exceedingly sharp; many resembled a lozenge,
being obtuse, and indented at the sides. All these bolts[6] receive different names, according to their
form; as, vire, vireton, sagette, garrot, bougon, &c., and they are usually only half the length of the
long-bow arrow, which in France measured two feet and a half. The wood was of various kinds; in
the statutes of the Gunmakers' Company of Paris, formed about the middle of the sixteenth century,
it is recorded that the chef d'oeuvre of the master of that company was a crossbow complete, with
its gaffle[7], a dozen well-brazed quarrils, duly and properly made of good seasoned yew, and a quiver
for the arrows, garnished with a cover.

It now remains to treat of the purposes to which the arbalist was applied. And here, making little
reference to its warlike character, I shall confine my remarks to the more pleasing considerations
connected with sylvan sport. The principles of its construction, and the requisite attention on the part
of the workman to form a perfect crossbow, will be accurately detailed.

It appears that the arbalist was formerly in Spain what the long bow was in our own country the
popular amusement of all ranks. By no other European nation was it brought to so high a degree of
perfection, and none more excelled in its use. Espinar has preserved the names and marks of those
ancient Spanish crossbow-makers who acquired a high degree of consideration in their art; though,
it may be observed, there were very few who could make the entire instrument. While one set of
artisans devoted themselves to the construction of the steel bow (verger), others only made the stock
(tablero), and the bender (gafa). The manufacture of arrows was likewise a distinct branch of the art.
These, as in France, bore names indicative of their form;--verote, jara, sostrore, passadore, &c.

A Spanish crossbow, when intended for the chase, generally measured two feet in length. The stock
in its most ancient form was square and somewhat flat, tapering gradually towards the extremity. It
is thus represented in a collection of costumes belonging to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
preserved in the royal cabinet of engravings at Paris.

As all sportsmen cannot accommodate themselves to one level, some crossbows had stocks perfectly
straight, whilst others were slightly curved from the nut to the extremity of the butt. The former
appear to be most favourable to correct shooting. Their mode of taking aim with the straight stock
was this: whilst the sportsman's left hand supported the upper end of the crossbow, he grasped the
butt with his right, placing the thumb above, and the forefinger below upon the trigger; the thumb was
then drawn just sufficiently under the eye to enable the shooter to discern the head of his quarril. On
covering his mark he pressed the trigger, and away flew the arrow. The crossbow with a crooked
stock was not raised to the eye, but to the cheek; a difference easily comprehended by those familiar
with the effects of a greater or less curvature in the stock of a modern fowlingpiece.

In a perfect crossbow, the recoil against the sportsman's cheek is so trifling as not in the least to
incommode him. Espinar expresses this quality by the word sobrosa,--gentle, agreeable. Its trigger
should be easy, and not liable to go off accidentally when the string is stretched upon the nut. The
lathe must be truly and accurately proportioned, for therein a crossbow's principal excellence consists;
from this its force and certainty are derived: for when the quarril twists and wabbles, instead of flying
straight, not only will its range be greatly diminished, but the sportsman is never secure of his shot.

This fault may arise from various causes; as when, through the ignorance or carelessness of the
workmen, the bow is not well fitted in the stock, one of its arms being higher than the other. The
force of the impulsion on either side is then unequal; and the higher arm, being mistress of the other,
disOrders tdisordershe quarril's flight. If this disparity be considerable, there results from it another
capital inconvenience. Owing to the bow not lying level, the string will never strike the arrow exactly
in the middle, and the aim, however correctly taken, must be unsuccessful in consequence. It is also
of primary importance that the notch in the nut of the crossbow hold the string exactly at its centre,
so that the mark which the nut impresses on it, trespass not the breadth of a horsehair on one side
more than on the other.

There are many other defects; as when the cord, pressing too tightly on the surface of the stock,
diminishes the power of the arms of the bow, prevents their playing freely, and causes the cord to act
not upon the centre of the quarril's butt, but lower down. The reverse of this fault is equally
disadvantageous to its flight. In the one case, it will go whirling and wriggling through the air; in the
other it is forced downwards, and quickly falls to the earth. Finally, a crossbow will shoot incorrectly,
when there is any considerable friction of the arrow upon the surface of the stock. The ancient
arbalister was very particular upon this point. Whilst the butt of his quarril rested in the notch of the
nut, he took care that its head only should be upon the upper end of the stock, none of the
intermediate portion coming in contact with it.

The point-blank range of an ordinary crossbow was twenty-five paces. At thirty, the arrow began to
lose its force, and to descend; this was, of course, in proportion to the strength and goodness of the
bow. The weaker sort, at merely an increase of five paces in the distance, drops the arrow two fingers'
breadth; the stronger, one finger only. The crossbowman, by repeated trials, made himself thoroughly
acquainted with the range of his weapon, and levelled higher or lower according to the distance of
his mark.

The next question which naturally arises is, what was the remotest flight of a bolt discharged from
a well-constructed arbaliste de chasse. According to the Spanish author, it would kill at one hundred
and fifty paces, or more. The military crossbow, of much larger dimensions, threw an arrow
considerably further, killing man or horse two hundred paces off. " Our archers and crossbowmen,"
says the author of the "Discipline Militaire," "will slay a naked man, ten or even twenty score further
off than the best arquebusiers; even harness, if not very strong, will at that distance be unable to resist
their quarrils." A celebrated modern French sportsman remarks, that this statement is by no means
an exaggerated one. He adds, that Mons. the Abbe Collomb, canon of Anneci, to oblige him and
gratify his curiosity, caused several of the best crossbows belonging to the society of archers there
to be fried before him. Certain of them, at a very small elevation, threw the arrow four hundred paces;
others three hundred end twenty, the smallest distance being two hundred and sixty. These shots were
measured by the ordinary military pace of from eighteen to twenty inches.[8] The reader, however, will
bear in mind that I am here speaking of the French arbalist. In the D unstable Chronicle, preserved
in the Harleian collection of MSS. No. 24., it is stated, that Henry V. came to the city of Rouen by
forty rods length, within shot of quarril. The rod is five and a half yards.[9]

Fire-arms doubtless possess some advantages over the crossbow, being more manageable, as well as
more rapid in their discharge. Yet there is one characteristic which gives a decided superiority to the
latter: I mean its silent discharge, which enables the hunter to get a second, and even a third shot,
should the first be unsuccessful, or the game abundant on any particular spot. Dominique
Boccamazza, who wrote a treatise on field-sports applicable to the country around Rome,[10] complains
that the use of the arquebuse had so alarmed and dispersed all animals of the deer kind, that the
sportsmen of his day rarely returned home satisfied with their chase.

When the ancient Spanish huntsman used the crossbow for the destruction of the larger species of
game, he shot with poisoned arrows, prepared by steeping their points in the expressed juice of white
hellebore, veratrum album, gathered in the month of August. Like the vegetable poisons used by the
barbarous' nations of Africa and South America, it produces death by coagulation of the blood, and
however slightly the animal may be wounded, its operation is so sudden, that the victim never floes
beyond 150 or 200 paces, and expires in a few minutes.

For this reason, the white hellebore is still called yerta da ballestero, or crossbow plant, by the country
people of Spain, who are proverbially tenacious of ancient usages.

It is generally asserted by those who have treated upon missile weapons, in use previous to the
invention of gunpowder, that the custom of poisoning arrows never prevailed in Europe. Espinar,
however, has thus set the question at rest, as far as relates, to his own countrymen; though there is
good reason for believing the practice was confined to Spain. Neither Modus, nor Phebus Comte de
Foix, make mention of it in their circumstantial details of the chase of the boar, the wolf, and the stag.
It is true, they speak of the long bow, alla not of the arbalist; but if poisoned arrows had at all been
familiar to the sportsmen of France, they were as applicable to the former as to the latter.

The crossbow, then, before the invention of fire-arms, formed the chief dependence of the hunter. It
was in much more general use than the long bow, over which it possessed the advantage of shooting
further[11], and with a truer aim. The sportsman could also adjust to it arrows of various descriptions,
according to the species of game of which he was in pursuit.

It will be readily understood what extreme accuracy of aim belonged to those who prided themselves
on their expertness with this weapon. To strike an object with the crossbow bolt is infinitely more
difficult than with a single rifle ball. As the crossbowman never shot flying,[12] and very rarely at
running game, a setter dog was infinitely more necessary for him than for the modern fowler,
especially when in pursuit of the hare or partridge. To train and break this dog required the utmost
skill and patience; and even when the animal was brought under a proper degree of subjection, his
sagacity availed little, unless his master also possessed a natural quickness of eye to discover the game
through all its concealment, while the dog held it at point; besides which, many little expedients, with
much adroitness and precaution, were requisite to obviate defects it was scarcely possible to remedy
altogether. Yet the crossbow continued to survive the invention of the arquebuse, even for a
considerable period after the latter was rendered far more manageable than at its first introduction.
In Spain, and also in Italy, they made occasional use of it during the seventeenth century. Espinar
repeatedly alludes to the crossbow, when describing certain royal hunting-matches at which he was
present, and he tells us that Philip IV. of Spain, to whom he acted as gunbearer, had in his service a
maker of these weapons, called John de Lostra. As to Italy, we see frequent representations of
huntsmen armed with the crossbow in the plates attached to Olina's Natural History of Birds, A.D.
1622; and in a Treatise on the Chase, by Eugenio Raimondi, published in 1626. Salnovius, the author
of a book on hunting well known in France, who wrote during the reign of Louis XIII., complains
that, in his time, the sovereigns of Europe killed the noble hart and fallow-deer with the crossbow and
fusil, instead of manfully chasing them with hound and horn, as their ancestors were wont to do.

Although this weapon has now been superseded by the fowlingpiece, in Spain, as elsewhere, the word
ballastero, or crossbowman, is still there used to signify a sportsman. Its application, however, is not
indiscriminate. For instance, they call him who occupies himself only in the chase of small game,
cozador. Montero, is a hunter who pursues the stag, the fallow-deer, and the wild boar, on horseback,
with dogs and gun; for, owing to the mountainous character of Spanish landscape, they are unable
to run the game down, as in more level countries. But ballestero, is one expert and skilled in every
description of chase, great and small; or, as we express it, a thorough-bred sportsman. It has been
remarked that shooting with the crossbow was more followed, brought to greater perfection, and
attended with higher honours in Spain, than in any other European country. Indeed, by an enactment
of James I. of that country, no knight's son, not being a knight himself, or a crossbowman, was
deemed worthy to sit at table with knights or their ladies.[13]

Hitherto, I have spoken only of the crossbow for discharging bolts or quarrils. It remains briefly to
describe that called in French, arc a gallet; or, in England, the road, or stone-bow. They were of a
much lighter, and, in many respects, of a construction very different from the others, the stock in its
upper part being either hollowed out, or formed into a semicircle. The cord was double, its two
portions being separated right and left by little cylinders of ivory placed at equal distance between the
two horns and centre of the bow. In the middle of this cord, was a contrivance for holding the ball,
called purse or cradle in English; in French, la fronde, or the sling. To charge the weaker sort of stone
bows, the hands alone suffice; but for the stronger, a bender is as necessary as for those intended to
cast arrows.

The stone-bow was used to kill small birds, as thrushes, blackbirds, larks, ortolans, or, at the utmost,
partridges and quails. Espinar, who enters so fully into every detail connected with the arbalist
properly so called, says not a word of the stone-bow, as if he disdained to speak of a thing so
insignificant.

Several of our ancient English dramatists were less fastidious; in Shakspeare's "Twelfth Night, or
What you Will," Sir Toby exclaims--

O. for a stone-bow! to hit him in the eye.--Act ii. se. 5.

Children will shortly take him for a wall, and set their stone bows in his forehead.--fletcher's King and no King.

Who ever will hit the mark of profit, must be like those who shoot with stone-bows, wink with one eye.--Marston's Dutch
Courtezan.

I will now present the reader with a translated passage from Le Plaisir des Champs[14], a poem by
Claude Gauchet D'Ampmartinois. It minutely describes the manner by which the ancient sportsman
manoeuvred his stone-bow:--

Then, with stone-bow in hand, I draw near, and placing a bullet in its sling[15], and the loop upon the nut of the lock, I bend it.
Through the little sight-hole therein, I espy my blackbird, and having covered her with the bead, I touch the trigger. The spring
flies; and the steel bow, recoiling with prodigious force, drives the ball through the yielding air, directly towards the bird. It
strikes; and, O lucky shot! my game falls to the ground, pierced through and through.

Should there be, as I suspect, no poetical exaggeration here, the bow must have been a very
extraordinary one, to pierce even so small an object through and through. It may be remarked, that
Gauchet speaks of the leaden bullet, instead of a clay ban; because, perhaps, plomb, a monosyllable,
agreed better than boulet, with the measure of his verse. In the sixteenth century, the stone-bow was
charged with clay balls and pebbles only, as its name imports.